By: Aliotta, P.J., Toussaint, Golia, JJ. Law Offices of Moira Doherty, P.C. (Janice P. Rosen of counsel), for appellant. Gary Tsirelman, P.C. (Gary Tsirelman of counsel), for respondent.
2019-685 K C. AMINOV v. NATIONAL LIAB. AND FIRE INS. — Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Robin S. Garson, J.), dated December 3, 2018. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, with $25 costs. In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Civil Court as denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. As plaintiff argued in opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment, the discrepancy between the affidavit submitted by defendant in support of its motion and the mailing logs defendant annexed as exhibits to that motion demonstrates that an issue of fact exists as to whether the denial of claim forms were mailed pursuant to a standard office practice or procedure which would have given rise to a presumption that the denial of claims forms had been properly addressed and mailed (see St. Vincent’s Hosp. of Richmond v. Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 [2008]; Residential Holding Corp. v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 286 AD2d 679 [2001]; TAM Med. Supply Corp. v. National Liab. & Fire Ins. Co., 53 Misc 3d 134[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 51423[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2016]). Thus, defendant did not demonstrate its entitlement to summary judgment. We reach no other issue. Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed. ALIOTTA, P.J., TOUSSAINT and GOLIA, JJ., concur. June 17, 2022
